Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Pulmonary arterial hypertension in patients with systemic sclerosis is a disease involving multiple organ systems. We investigated the differences in perceptions of how to measure PAH-SSc among cardiologists, pulmonologists and rheumatologists. We also examined how a Delphi exercise can improve agreement among these subspecialties.

METHODS: The outcome measures derived from the recent Delphi survey were used for a detailed analysis of the contribution of the various specialties contributing to it. We compared rheumatologists and cardiologist/pulmonologists with regards to preferences and ratings of various endpoints and the actual use of tools to measure these outcomes. We also examined the effects of the Delphi process among these groups.

RESULTS: We could show that the different expert groups each tended to contribute differently to the development of the core set of measures and that interactions in the Delphi process resulted in convergence of rankings. Despite agreement on the high importance of the domains in the Delphi, the use of tools within those domains was sometimes divergent and dependent on specialty.

CONCLUSIONS: Based on these results, use of differing tools in the diagnosis and treatment of PAH-SSc can be anticipated. Further, the convergence of results provides evidence, for the first time, for the ability of various approaches in these disciplines to reach harmonious endpoints of care for PAHSSc patients. A collaborative, interdisciplinary approach is advantageous for PAH-SSc patients.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Pulmonary arterial hypertension in patients with systemic sclerosis is a disease involving multiple organ systems. We investigated the differences in perceptions of how to measure PAH-SSc among cardiologists, pulmonologists and rheumatologists. We also examined how a Delphi exercise can improve agreement among these subspecialties.

METHODS: The outcome measures derived from the recent Delphi survey were used for a detailed analysis of the contribution of the various specialties contributing to it. We compared rheumatologists and cardiologist/pulmonologists with regards to preferences and ratings of various endpoints and the actual use of tools to measure these outcomes. We also examined the effects of the Delphi process among these groups.

RESULTS: We could show that the different expert groups each tended to contribute differently to the development of the core set of measures and that interactions in the Delphi process resulted in convergence of rankings. Despite agreement on the high importance of the domains in the Delphi, the use of tools within those domains was sometimes divergent and dependent on specialty.

CONCLUSIONS: Based on these results, use of differing tools in the diagnosis and treatment of PAH-SSc can be anticipated. Further, the convergence of results provides evidence, for the first time, for the ability of various approaches in these disciplines to reach harmonious endpoints of care for PAHSSc patients. A collaborative, interdisciplinary approach is advantageous for PAH-SSc patients.

Article Networks

TrendTerms displays relevant terms of the abstract of this publication and related documents on a map. The terms and their relations were extracted from ZORA using word statistics. Their timelines are taken from ZORA as well. The bubble size of a term is proportional to the number of documents where the term occurs. Red, orange, yellow and green colors are used for terms that occur in the current document; red indicates high interlinkedness of a term with other terms, orange, yellow and green decreasing interlinkedness. Blue is used for terms that have a relation with the terms in this document, but occur in other documents.
You can navigate and zoom the map. Mouse-hovering a term displays its timeline, clicking it yields the associated documents.